I am struggling to see how a camera that measures speed and license plates (and doesn’t even see the race of the driver) can show any bias. What exactly is the issue here?

Isn’t this the most fair, robotic, boring enforcement of a law? It is truly, truly impartial. It’s measurable in an impartial way. There’s evidence in an impartial way (photos). There’s an opportunity to address exceptions (different driver, emergency, etc). But the speed sensors are regularly calibrated and either you were speeding or you weren’t, and there’s ample measured and documented evidence of it.

Is the issue that more cameras are being placed in minority neighborhoods? More miles driven? Or that all things equal, somehow they’re tagging more cars as speeding in minority neighborhoods? What exactly is the angle? Because I’m not able to see one other than “the punishment affects some populations more than others”

So maybe there’s an argument to fine based on income?

What are we missing here?

If one takes as a given that traffic laws are normally enforced in a discriminatory manner by humans, then one might infer that minorities drive more carefully than the average citizen as a result, (incentives!) and therefore when we see a disparity such as with traffic cameras, there must be significant racial bias even if it is not obvious and it is supposed to be "objective." Whether it be camera placement, algorithms, or something else.

Does that make sense?

When you know the answer to something in advance, you don't throw away your facts based on a chain of logical reasoning, you look for the flaw in the reasoning.

After reading the article, they have lots of information on where the disparities are arising. The wide streets where the city speed limit seems excessively low tend to predominate in the ticketing.

I haven't lived in a city with widespread speed cameras, but I know the type of street exactly.

In fact, it's been my opinion for a long time that a certain stretch of highway going out of my city is marked for 30 mph to ensure that police always have probable cause to stop anyone no matter what.

Just a little further it's posted for 45 mph, and people go 55+.

Anyone who goes at the speed of traffic in the 30 zone can be stopped for speeding, and anyone who goes the speed limit can be stopped for obstructing traffic and probable intoxication.

But at least there aren't automated cameras.

Your example was actually a really good one. I also know a handful of streets where I think to myself "why did they even set such a low speed limit" and it feels deliberate in a money-making scheme.

I read half the article before becoming frustrated.

Do they ever ask the obvious question - are there racial disparities in driving? Is there some cosmic physical law that forces all races and cultures to drive the same way?

This is the type of race baiting that loses democrats votes.

As I see it, the problem is that there is no real way to record data on actual racially-correlated behavior, because doing so will be accused of being inherently racist.

Even if you did, nobody in their right mind would publish results that show minorities in a bad light, even if the data backing it up was impeccable, reproducible, and unequivocal.

Hell, I expect to be down-voted for suggesting the mere possibility that such could be the result of some studies. Race and science are a radioactive combination.

> Even if you did, nobody in their right mind would publish results that show minorities in a bad light

political correctness gone mad this is. Just because a group is a minority doesn't make them immune from being critisized if there indeed behaviours that aren't acceptable from them.

This is basically racism - just the other angle - where you're afraid of critisizing a race.

It’s the elephant in that room. The article seemed fuzzy as to whether it’s more important to talk about frequency of infraction vs economic harm when fines are a big fraction of income. But if you can’t afford the ticket, don’t run the fucking red light you idiot.

This I feel is the core of the issue:

> Residential density is another factor. Denser neighborhoods have more cars, more traffic and more pedestrians, all factors that cause motorists to intuitively slow down, experts said.

> And in Chicago, which has seen an exodus of Black residents in recent decades, Black neighborhoods are far less dense than their white counterparts.

So the ticketing distribution is indicative of a larger structural problem. And of course, the quick and easy solution focuses on ticket fines, not, you know, actually investing in neighborhoods.

Former Chicago resident here: the variable they need to control for is average speed along the routes with red lights. Because 1) Chicago is one of the most segregated cities in America and 2) the street traffic on the predominantly white Northside was pretty terrible. Picture 2 - 4 lane streets that are backed up such that it’s hard to ever get up to speed.

Meanwhile, the main roads on the South and West side are much more open. So it’s much easier to get up to speed and try to make the light.

I like ProPublica but this isn’t up to their usual standard of analysis.

If you grant that speed cameras save lives, and if these cameras are placed disproportionately in regions where Black and Latino people live, then you are discriminatory only in that you’re saving more Black and Latino lives than if the cameras were evenly distributed.